Recent Cases

Overview

I recently obtained a full withdrawal of a sexual assault charge after conducting a meticulous analysis of the complainant’s police statement, medical records, and the forensic laboratory reports. Significant inconsistencies emerged between the complainant’s account and the objective evidence. These inconsistencies included the presence of multiple drugs in her system despite her claim of no drug use, and the absence of any DNA despite her assertion of ejaculation. Once these issues were presented to the Crown, the prosecution determined it could not substantiate the allegations and withdrew the charge prior to trial.

This case serves as an important illustration of how diligent pre-trial work, careful evidence review, and proper use of s. 276 procedures can fundamentally change the trajectory of a prosecution.

Background

The accused was charged with one count of sexual assault arising from a night that they got together. The complainant told her family she was leaving because she had someone delivering her a vape. This was completely untrue based on a careful review of all their messages. The complainant did not provide any of these texts with the police. However, my client did provide them for me. The complainant provided a detailed statement to police alleging non-consensual sexual activity and was clear and unequivocal in claiming that:

• She had not consumed any drugs, and
• The accused had ejaculated during the alleged encounter.

These details became critical because they were purported to corroborate her account. The client denied the allegations entirely and maintained that the complainant’s description of events was factually impossible.

Defence Investigation and Evidence Review

Our office undertook a comprehensive pre-trial review, obtaining and analyzing:

• Paramedic and hospital records;
• Toxicology reports;
• Sexual assault examination findings;
• RCMP/CFS DNA laboratory reports;
• The full text of the complainant’s recorded statement.

Two major inconsistencies emerged:

1. Toxicology Results Directly Contradicted the Complainant’s Statement

Although the complainant told police she had not used any drugs, the medical records showed the presence of multiple substances in her system at clinically relevant levels. This contradiction raised concerns about:

• Her reliability and accuracy in recounting events, and
• Her level of intoxication and memory.

2. DNA Analysis Undermined a Core Element of the Allegation

The complainant stated without hesitation that the accused ejaculated inside her. However, the forensic laboratory report found no DNA from the accused. Not even trace levels. Given that ejaculation typically leaves detectable genetic material, this absence was a significant blow to the credibility of the allegation.

The combination of these two issues demonstrated that the objective evidence could not support the complainant’s narrative in several key respects.

Engagement With the Crown

After compiling a detailed evidentiary brief outlining the inconsistencies, I met with the prosecutor to:

• Highlight the conflict between the complainant’s version of events and the medical findings;
• Explain why the DNA results fundamentally challenged the allegation of ejaculation;
• Emphasize the resulting evidentiary gaps and the low likelihood of a reasonable prospect of conviction.

Following review of the materials, the Crown concluded that the prosecution could not proceed.

Outcome

The Crown withdrew the sexual assault charge in full. There was no trial, no plea, and no conditions imposed.

My client, who had been facing the life-altering consequences of a sexual assault allegation, was able to move forward with his life without a criminal record or further court involvement.

Important Insights

• Objective evidence matters. Medical records, toxicology data, and forensic DNA reports can be decisive in assessing the reliability of a complaint.
• Early defence investigation can shift a case’s trajectory. Thorough evidence review allowed us to uncover contradictions that had not been identified during the initial police investigation.
• A charge can be withdrawn before trial when the prosecution’s case cannot be supported. Diligent pre-trial work often leads to resolution without the need for litigation in open court.

Conclusion

This case underscores the importance of comprehensive evidence analysis in sexual assault matters. By carefully comparing the complainant’s statements with the medical and forensic record, we demonstrated significant inconsistencies that ultimately led the Crown to withdraw the charge.

If you or someone you know is facing allegations of sexual assault, early legal representation is critical. A proactive defence strategy can make all the difference. Please contact us today.